Ford's desire to expediently wrap up the recall and its negative publicity will surely cost the automaker, but not nearly as much as we had previously estimated. According to the report, Ford has sold 4,800 of the 11,500 Escape crossovers covered in the recall, vehicles that were built between October 8, 2011 and July 11, 2012. That means the additional $300 payments would cost the automaker $1.44 million.

TI Automotive continues to provide fuel lines for the Escape, according to Reuters, and has fixed the manufacturing problem.

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.

[blocked]

That's interesting, because when Motortrend set out to compare the top crossovers in the segment priced around $30,000 (within a grand or two) they found that the Escape was their top choice. It offered all the same features as the other crossovers plus it had the best navigation system and was the only one to feature a power liftgate and still came in almost $1,000 less than the CR-V they tested.
If you look at your absurd comparison from Inside Line that compared the most expensive CR-V possible to the most expensive Escape they found that the Escape that had V6 power (from the 2.0L EcoBoost engine) got worse mileage than the CR-V and that the Escape with panoramic sunroof, self parking, push button start, and MyFordTouch was too expensive compared to the plebian CR-V.
And finally the absurd Motorweek comparison of the fleet-spec S model to a CR-V that exceeded their $25k price ceiling. The first word in the "what they liked" category for the CR-V was "Features." and the first sentence for "what they didn't" about the Escape (which was the cheapest of the test) was "Lack of features". They hated the styling and driving dynamics of the CR-V (the things that can't be changed by adding options) and they loved the styling and dynamics of the Escape but it lost major points for lacking features and it wasn't equipped with the more powerful and most fuel efficient 1.6L EcoBoost engine.
You're going to have to keep dreaming if you think Honda has any edge in the automotive industry anymore.

[blocked]

There is a $1000 rebate on the Escape right now. Had they incorporated that into the pricing, the 1.6L Ecoboost Escape SE would have fallen below their $25000 cap, and would have likely done much better, just as Motor Trend found when the Escape came in 1st in their comparison.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/suvs/1209_2012_2013_compact_crossover_suv_comparison/

gee, lets compare a bare bones base model because an SE with the 1.6 turbo engine nicer interior, Sync, keyless entry 17 inch alloys ( to name but a few std features ) Msrps over 25k ( which at $25425 so does the honda...so whats up with the double standards? ) yep, nothing bias here, but duley noted was the LACK OF FEATURES on the base model....sheesh.

Virtually all the parts in a car are made by suppliers instead of in-house. So saying it's a supplier issue is redundant.
If Ford seeded this story to distract from their quality problems, that's low class.
Ford says quality is job 1 and quality requires monitoring your suppliers and checking the the parts you receive. If you receive bad parts and put them on a vehicle, you have to take responsibility for the results.
I'm sure Ford will be reimbursed by their supplier for the defective parts, because the supplier produced a defective part. But Ford has to take on the rest.

[blocked]

"Some of the fuel lines were "mechanically scored" at TI Automotive's plant in Ashley, Indiana, according to documents Ford filed Friday with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration."
Straight out of the Reuters story.........
So what you're saying is that Ford did not say TI Automotive did not cause the scoring of the fuel lines??

Suppliers are often the cause of most recalls, but the actual OEM is still responsible for selecting components/suppliers that meet the quality expectations of the company. At the end of the day, If I am the manufacturer, I am still accountable for the product that I wholesale/retail, regardless of where the problem originated. Otherwise, this would end up just being a finger-pointing quarrel in which the OEM-Supplier relationship would suffer and we'd be left with characteristics more aligned with our recent/on-going politicians

I don't own a Ford, but their handling of this issue is far better than waiting a year or two and then saying they will remove a portion of the lower plastic shield to let fluid leak to the ground. They never denied there was a problem, they fixed it promptly regardless of who was at fault, and by all accounts had treated the customer better than I have ever been treated at my Toyota or Chevrolet dealers.

well judging by this exert from aarons post....."Here at Motorweek, it came in last. 6th place. Video coming on the 28th, till then, read more".....he works at the very place that performed an extremely squewed bias comparo.....kind of explains everything really.....

[blocked]

It's a big difference between it being a major design flaw/defect by the car manufacturer and being a bad part from an outside supplier. Look at everyone that wants to say how shitty 1st gen Toyota Tacoma and Tundra trucks are because of the rusty frames and blame Toyota for it, when the frames were from an outside supplier (and a very reputable one at that).

Question: What if I purchased a 2013 Ford Escape and the Engine lost it's oil and overheated causing smoke and engine failure. While in route with my husband, a returning injured veteran, to go to an appointment at the doctor, to have to reschedule. Also to have to sit in 98 degree heat and had to be towed to the dealership?
They kept it at the dealership and provided a rental. I am so discussed. I know the value of my Escape is now not what it would have been prior to the engine replacement.